Posted on 10/10/2012 8:09:47 AM PDT by Beowulf
They get tax abatements because they employ a large number of new workers, both in the construction and in the operation of their superstores.
.
.
.
I stopped reading after the first sentence. The part time jobs they provide are at the expense of stable full time jobs with benefits. The jobs are not additional new jobs to the area, the are simply moved from one location to the other. Sales tax revenues are not increased in the long run. When you have a Walmart food center open, another food store closes. I’m not naive enough to buy the theory touted by Walmartist’s that because a Walmart moves in all of a sudden people eat that much more food. NO - it’s business taken from somewhere else. The tax revenue abatements and givebacks never seem to pan out 10-20 years down the road. The benefits are channeled directly to Bentonville.
The scholarships they offer sound grand until you figure it based as a percentage of gross sales. Then they’re pathetic.
The insurance they offer is laughable.
Their charitable donations as a percentage of gross sales doesn’t equal a fraction of the local donations and support the communities received from the “evil” local businesses.
Bottom line - A Free market entity does not subsidize one business at the expense of another. If you believe that you’re living in the wrong country!
Well, one way to check your theory would be to examine the economic devastation that Wal-Mart visits on its neighbors. Oh, wait . . . Wal-Marts are located vibrant areas with lots of traffic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.